Difference between revisions of "Sovereign Praxis"

From Cibernética Americana
 
(24 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<div class="plainlinks" style="background-color: maroon; color: white;">
 
<div class="plainlinks" style="background-color: maroon; color: white;">
 
__NOTOC__
 
__NOTOC__
<div style="background-color: black;"><blockquote><center><span style="font-family: 'Michroma', sans-serif;">Ayn Marx-Rant 4719</span></center>
+
<div style="background-color: black;"><blockquote><center><span style="font-family: 'Michroma', sans-serif;">Ayn Marx Rant 4719</span></center>
 
<div style="text-align: justify;width='95%'; background-color: #404040; color: white;">
 
<div style="text-align: justify;width='95%'; background-color: #404040; color: white;">
<blockquote><br>
+
<blockquote>
 +
<table style="background-color: #404040;" width=100%><tr><td width=80%>
 
Text I placed in EnWiki was for a time used as the distinguishing characteristic of Capitalism, focused on markets and market actors. These days I'm more inclined to identify the Capitalist epoch in the economic history of a society  as the period where exchange value progressively drowns out every other form until further progression becomes impossible and there is a reassertion of more fundamental values, e.g. use, non-monetizable ones such as fairness, quality of life, etc. and a rejection of finance Capital and the joint-stock company as parasitic strictures on social production. As far as defining Capitalism as a thing distinct from its material historical reality, that's pretty much for anybody to do as they please and a number of people have done. Just as the existing thing despite its fatal shortcomings has not been without the production of much good, there are formulations of Capitalism that its hard to argue with, they just haven't actually been realized anywhere much like stateless communism.
 
Text I placed in EnWiki was for a time used as the distinguishing characteristic of Capitalism, focused on markets and market actors. These days I'm more inclined to identify the Capitalist epoch in the economic history of a society  as the period where exchange value progressively drowns out every other form until further progression becomes impossible and there is a reassertion of more fundamental values, e.g. use, non-monetizable ones such as fairness, quality of life, etc. and a rejection of finance Capital and the joint-stock company as parasitic strictures on social production. As far as defining Capitalism as a thing distinct from its material historical reality, that's pretty much for anybody to do as they please and a number of people have done. Just as the existing thing despite its fatal shortcomings has not been without the production of much good, there are formulations of Capitalism that its hard to argue with, they just haven't actually been realized anywhere much like stateless communism.
  
I certainly mean the name to be associated with the last and least complete part of [[Critique of Dialectical Reason|Sartre's Critique]].
+
I certainly mean the name to be associated with the last and least complete part of [[Critique of Dialectical Reason|Sartre's Critique]].</td>
 +
<td align=center width=13%><br><html><a href=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism><img title="Henry George" style="height:150px;position: relative;" src=https://meansofproduction.biz/images/HG.jpg></a>  </html>
 +
</td></tr></table>
 
== Distinguishing Characteristics ==
 
== Distinguishing Characteristics ==
 
I define it (SP) as transformed production where workers are free traders interacting with social capital directly. The disintermediation and nationalization of finance is the top level change accompanied by these diverged production practices:
 
I define it (SP) as transformed production where workers are free traders interacting with social capital directly. The disintermediation and nationalization of finance is the top level change accompanied by these diverged production practices:
 
<blockquote>
 
<blockquote>
# In historical context, intensification and clarification rather than enervating grifts and obfuscation by various private or public conspiracies wrt relations of production. In global society a vast range of situations exists with respect to present and past social/labor relations of production.  Labor unions, the failed socialist states, and basic awareness of current human nature are among the things that give pause to any moves to worker solidarity. It is a notion that precedes me but which I intend to give the fullest expression, that cycles of Capitalism cannot cease until its principle has completed its useful role in development. So far, with Capitalism based on the joint stock company, we have not even seen a Capitalism of modern times equivalent to the individuality of principates, directorial and other traditional types, moguls/tycoons fronting such firms notwithstanding. For this reason, and by my personal inclination to support the principles of self determination, supreme individualism, autonomy and the natural right of private property in so far as works one creates one's self, I am resistant to fusion with any group that is unexamined or clearly in conflict with these principles, which the vast majority are intrinsically by their uncritical adoption of relations from the prevailing order. I am focused mainly on my productive powers and am only concerned with external social and distribution issues when they become specifically tasked subject matter for me. Prior to that, these issues are mere technical details to be addressed in when the time of vintage doing for the Public Market is come.<br><br>
+
# In historical context, intensification and clarification rather than enervating grifts and obfuscation by various private or public conspiracies against social production. In global society a vast range of situations exists with respect to present and past social/labor relations of production.  Labor unions, the failed socialist states, and basic awareness of current human nature are among the things that give pause to any moves to worker solidarity. It is a notion that precedes me but which I intend to give the fullest expression, that cycles of Capitalism cannot cease until its principle has completed its useful role in development. So far, with Capitalism based on the joint stock company, we have not even seen a Capitalism of modern times equivalent to the individuality of principates, directorial and other traditional types, moguls/tycoons fronting such firms notwithstanding. For this reason, and by my personal inclination to support the principles of self determination, supreme individualism, autonomy and the natural right of private property in so far as works one creates one's self, I am resistant to fusion with any group that is unexamined or clearly in conflict with these principles, which the vast majority are intrinsically by their uncritical adoption of relations from the prevailing order. I am focused mainly on my productive powers and am only concerned with external social and distribution issues when they become specifically tasked subject matter for me. Prior to that, these issues are mere technical details to be addressed when the time of vintage doing for the Public Market is come.<br><br>
 
# [[:en:Workers' self-management|<font color=lime>Worker control</font>]]. This is actually present in the prevailing mode as a stipulation when workers are not employees, in order to make clear that the contract worker has assumed all the responsibilities of an employer. This control factor is generally useful to distinguish actually free independent workers from various kinds of exploitative labor resale where the labor is sold as contracted or outsourced and the relation between the worker and exploiter/reseller is one of employee/employer. A free worker is strictly self employed and deals with other employers as a peer concern, including any 3rd party agents. In particular, standard firms generally want the actually independent worker to show insurance and other liability limiting factors that they would have if dealing with the worker via a reseller that absorbs the cost of those factors, i.e. dealing with a legal peer in the labor transaction (or a subalterned unit if a direct hire).<br><br>
 
# [[:en:Workers' self-management|<font color=lime>Worker control</font>]]. This is actually present in the prevailing mode as a stipulation when workers are not employees, in order to make clear that the contract worker has assumed all the responsibilities of an employer. This control factor is generally useful to distinguish actually free independent workers from various kinds of exploitative labor resale where the labor is sold as contracted or outsourced and the relation between the worker and exploiter/reseller is one of employee/employer. A free worker is strictly self employed and deals with other employers as a peer concern, including any 3rd party agents. In particular, standard firms generally want the actually independent worker to show insurance and other liability limiting factors that they would have if dealing with the worker via a reseller that absorbs the cost of those factors, i.e. dealing with a legal peer in the labor transaction (or a subalterned unit if a direct hire).<br><br>
 
# Labor paid by value rather than job time. Standard capitalist practice is like softened chattel slavery where the master/capital or its proxy rents rather than owns the worker. Much obfuscation is spewed to cover this core relation of master and slave but it inevitably makes itself felt sooner rather than later especially when workers take formal freedoms seriously, particularly ones suited to and hard won from an early stage of capital-labor relations, and then encounter the reality of their status as (non-self) employees in a later triumphal stage.<br><br>In Work Breakdown Structures for my projects I may assign a wage to a tasks resource assignment. In this case the wage is a factor applied to my current retained day rate used with the estimated makespan strictly for planning purpose, without regard to the value of the completed task. For this reason, in cases where there is an excess of value relative to this wage, performing the task myself is indicated.<br><br>
 
# Labor paid by value rather than job time. Standard capitalist practice is like softened chattel slavery where the master/capital or its proxy rents rather than owns the worker. Much obfuscation is spewed to cover this core relation of master and slave but it inevitably makes itself felt sooner rather than later especially when workers take formal freedoms seriously, particularly ones suited to and hard won from an early stage of capital-labor relations, and then encounter the reality of their status as (non-self) employees in a later triumphal stage.<br><br>In Work Breakdown Structures for my projects I may assign a wage to a tasks resource assignment. In this case the wage is a factor applied to my current retained day rate used with the estimated makespan strictly for planning purpose, without regard to the value of the completed task. For this reason, in cases where there is an excess of value relative to this wage, performing the task myself is indicated.<br><br>
Line 24: Line 27:
 
== See Also ==
 
== See Also ==
 
* [[Knowledge and Class: A Marxian Critique of Political Economy]]
 
* [[Knowledge and Class: A Marxian Critique of Political Economy]]
 +
* <span class=plainlinks>[https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/early-china/article/abs/epiphanies-of-sovereignty-and-the-rite-of-jade-disc-immersion-in-weft-narratives/2AF5BC0D6E9DCC7AE0E9725C0545546F EPIPHANIES OF SOVEREIGNTY]</span>
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==

Latest revision as of 04:28, 30 August 2022